Talk:$upaxis: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(New page: == XSI Mod Tool == The page states that XSI doesn't need the $upaxis command in a qc, but i needed to use -X as its value to get a model aligned correctly. Without it the model was lying o...) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== XSI Mod Tool == | == XSI Mod Tool == | ||
The page states that XSI doesn't need the $upaxis command in a qc, but i needed to use -X as its value to get a model aligned correctly. Without it the model was lying on its side in hammer but upright in XSI Mod Tool. Im using v6.01 but i doubt it would be any different using the normal non-free XSI version. --[[User:Stucuk|Stucuk]] 18:55, 16 June 2009 (UTC) | The page states that XSI doesn't need the $upaxis command in a qc, but i needed to use -X as its value to get a model aligned correctly. Without it the model was lying on its side in hammer but upright in XSI Mod Tool. Im using v6.01 but i doubt it would be any different using the normal non-free XSI version. --[[User:Stucuk|Stucuk]] 18:55, 16 June 2009 (UTC) | ||
[EDIT] Seems like adding in $staticprop removed the need to add $upaxis "-X" --[[User:Stucuk|Stucuk]] 18:59, 16 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 11:59, 16 June 2009
XSI Mod Tool
The page states that XSI doesn't need the $upaxis command in a qc, but i needed to use -X as its value to get a model aligned correctly. Without it the model was lying on its side in hammer but upright in XSI Mod Tool. Im using v6.01 but i doubt it would be any different using the normal non-free XSI version. --Stucuk 18:55, 16 June 2009 (UTC) [EDIT] Seems like adding in $staticprop removed the need to add $upaxis "-X" --Stucuk 18:59, 16 June 2009 (UTC)